Legalities
Life, Politics and the Law From ABC News Correspondent Jan Crawford Greenburg
Jan Crawford Greenburg is a correspondent for ABC News' bureau in Washington DC. She covers politics, the Supreme Court and provides legal analysis for ABC News. She is a graduate of the University of Chicago's law school and is a member of the New York bar.
RECENT POSTS
- LIVESTREAMING THE SOTOMAYOR HEARINGS
- Supreme Court Puts Chrysler’s Sale to Fiat on Hold
- White House Contacted Sotomayor Before Souter Announced His Retirement
- Becoming Nominee Sotomayor
- Judge Wood Goes to Washington
- Obama: Fortifying Bush's policies on terror
- The Pitfalls of Politics
- A Stealth Nominee?
- Who's on the Way to the Court: Chart the Course
MONTHLY ARCHIVES
| Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | |||
| 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 |
| 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 |
| 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 |
| 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 |
« Previous | Main | Next »
"The Principals" of Interrogation
April 10, 2008 8:28 AM
This is a link to a my World News story last night that I've spent the last five months reporting. It's about what sources said was the role of some of the President's most senior and influential advisers--Principals of the National Security Council--in approving so-called "enhanced interrogation techniques" on captured al Qaeda prisoners. In dozens of discussions and meetings, sources said, a handful of those advisers discussed specific prisoners and exactly how those prisoners would be interrogated. Whether for example, they would be slapped, pushed, deprived of sleep, or subjected to simulated drowning--water-boarding. You can read a more detailed version here. This is a related story that offers The Principals' defense of the "enhanced interrogation" program and another about efforts by civil liberties groups to uncover the legal documents about the treatment of terror detainees.
April 10, 2008 | Permalink | User Comments (3)
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
I think it's time for impeachment to be back on the table. This is not the United States whose uniform I proudly wore. This is Stalin, Hitler, Pol Pot, Mao and yes, Saddam all rolled into one.
Posted by: Tom | Apr 10, 2008 10:54:06 AM
Didn't President Bush just come right out and say he authorized the meeting of principles in the White House to plan the torture of the 'high value' detainees? (Boy, those CIA guys were not going to be left holding the bag on this.)
And didn't Attorney General Ashcroft say what a mistake it was to be meeting in the White House to plan torture?
And didn't John Yoo deliver a legal justification - in the form of an opinion from OLC - that was supposed to give the principles and the decider legal cover but sadly the opinion has basis in law and because it does not hold water and because it was drafted after torture was ordered, it too will be discredited and rendered impotent.
It seems the media is completely disinterested in what the President knew and when he knew it.
It will of course take some outrage to change the executive in this country to be accountable to the rule of law. We should protect the Constitution and hold the President accountable to the law.
Posted by: neil | Apr 14, 2008 11:51:02 PM
Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas, for example, told the Senate that they had strong respect for Supreme Court precedents. On the court they were the justices most likely to vote to overturn those precedents. Justice David Souter deferred more to precedent than his Senate testimony suggested he would.
Posted by: neil | Apr 15, 2008 11:03:28 AM
Post a comment
